price of 70 million baht, which created an unlawful benefit for Mr. Bhusana. Miss Ploykaew Pariswong, Miss Kornrawan and Mr. Nanthawat Bhudithaiyarasak, who were Energy System Engineering and Service

gained the benefit were dishonest duty performance, as specified under Section 89/7 and Paragraph 2 of Section 281/2 of the SEA. The public prosecutor decided not to pursue the case in court and the case

benefit, the actual price was 40 million baht. Therefore, their acts were considered that they dishonestly violated duties as well as obtained unlawful gains for themselves or another person and caused

benefit, the actual price was 40 million baht. Therefore, their acts were considered that they dishonestly violated duties as well as obtained unlawful gains for themselves or another person and caused

benefit, the actual price was 40 million baht. Therefore, their acts were considered that they dishonestly violated duties as well as obtained unlawful gains for themselves or another person and caused

Mr.Apichart's benefit, the actual price was 40 million baht. Therefore, their acts were considered that they dishonestly violated duties as well as obtained unlawful gains for themselves or another person

or another person and caused damage to ACAP as well as kept incorrect or inaccurate accounts to deceitfully deprive ACAP of their rightful benefit. This case is under consideration of the public

caused damage to ACAP as well as kept incorrect or inaccurate accounts to deceitfully deprive ACAP of their rightful benefit. This case is under consideration of the public prosecutor. SEC Act S.307 311

another person and caused damage to ACAP as well as kept incorrect or inaccurate accounts to deceitfully deprive ACAP of their rightful benefit. This case is under consideration of the public prosecutor

caused damage to ACAP as well as kept incorrect or inaccurate accounts to deceitfully deprive ACAP of their rightful benefit. This case is under consideration of the public prosecutor. SEC Act S.307 and